Calling all Benson-class & Gleaves-class DD fans

[falcon04]

Rick - Wow! Pretty much covers it !

I note that there does not appear to be a fixed catwalk between the mid and aft deckhouse in pics where there is a clear view.

I see what you mean about the positioning of the 3 "tubs" port/stbd, and the fact that the middle tub is more inboard on either side.

More than enough to work with - Thanks !

[Rick E Davis]

Actually, I don't think the middle "tub" is more inboard than the forward tub. It is just that the forward most "tubs" are built on the taper of the deck.

BENSON (DD-421) with five 5-in guns. Note the deck shape, the 53 mount was removed and the 50-cal MG's installed on the deck. They would have had to add a small semi-circle of deck for the forward tubs. The two 20-mm tubs seen here were I think in the same location as the aft most 50-cal MG's, only the tubs are larger in diameter.


I forgot to say that BRISTOL as completed was a hybrid between the earlier units and the remaining "Repeat BENSON-GLEAVES". BRISTOL was the last unit to complete with a 50-cal armament. But she had some "lessons learned" features, like the fully enclosed gun mounts.

[Dick J]

I note that there does not appear to be a fixed catwalk between the mid and aft deckhouse in pics where there is a clear view.

The catwalks only showed up after the US had spent some time escorting in the North Atlantic. The crews needed a safer place to traverse fore-and-aft in heavy seas than the main deck. (This same problem is what finally got the Royal Navy to move its DD's officer's quarters forward, starting with the R class.) The catwalks helped in the Pacific, too, but the stormy winters in the Atlantic made the need an "every day" thing.

[falcon04]

In taking a long look at the photos, it appears the the aft tub(s) are mounted more outboard than the forward and mid tubs - and that the aft tub has 2 vertical supports. This is most prominent in the pics looking aft from the stbd quarter.

Also noticeable is the slightly taller splinter shield on the stbd aft tub.

This applies to the stbd side - the aft tub on the port side also has the 2 supports, but does not appear much larger than the forward 2 tubs.

I assume that this is to give clearance for the 5" mount and also the emergency conn.

I guess that the aft tubs were the first added and then the 4 others were mounted slightly inboard and the supports were not needed.

[Rick E Davis]

Yes the aft pair (starboard and port) of 20-mm tubs were outboard more than the other four and that required the vertical supports. When the BENSON-GLEAVES upgraded from 50-cal MG's to 20-mm guns, many times these same types of vertical supports were required. My suspicion is that the aft con needed more room ... yes as I mentioned before. Actually all of these 50-cal MG's were added at the same time when the aft deckhouse searchlight tower was cutaway. The plan always was to upgrade to 20-mm guns when they were available.

PS: I think all of the 50-cal tubs on the aft deckhouse are the same height. There is some parallax problems in viewing from a negative angle with the aft most tubs being onboard more with more surface area exposed.

[falcon04]

Rick - thanks. Invaluable stuff as always.

Re: Depth Charges

In looking at all my refs. on and off the web, I notice that most if not all early Benson/Gleaves - early 1942 and earlier - do not have the K-guns, and pics of those with Y-guns are few.

When did the first K-guns hit the fleet?

Re: benches on port side of aft deckhouse

I assume these went away when the K-guns were installed. Did the aft deckhouse have the crew wash/shower room as in the Four Pipers. ? Would explain the "lounge" area & benches.

Re: watertight doors on aft deckhouse.

There seem to be variations in the placement of doors - any rules of thumb ?

[snipechief]

Falcon, to answer your question about the crew Washroom in the aft deck house - yes, the head and washroom were located there. The plan view is shown here: http://www.hnsa.org/doc/plans/dd618.pdf

Jim

[Rick E Davis]

The K-Guns on the BENSON-GLEAVES were installed in early 1942. The installation of K-Guns and storage of reloads required removal of the benches.

The BENSON-GLEAVES classes (and I think FLETCHER class) were structurally designed to support the installation of Y-Guns. They were installed in mid-late 1941. The Y-Gun is hard to spot in profile views. Y-Gun depth charge projectors actually go back to WWI, in peacetime they were not installed on the destroyers.

[Rick E Davis]

Falcon,

I have to revise what I said in our discussion on the positions of the 50-cal MG's on the early GLEAVES class aft deckhouse. I exchanged e-mails with Dave Baker and one of the subjects I asked about was if he knew the placement of these 50-cal MG's. He says he has a drawing for one of the ships and it shows that they are symmetrical left to right. There still could be a little difference in the installations between units because of different yards doing the work (Boston and Charleston for sure) but don't get too excited about it. I hope I can find the "standard" radius for 50-cal "tubs", that would help in building them. Sorry for faulty information.

Rick

[falcon04]

Thanks, Rick.

I was pretty sure that the "tubs" were symmetrically placed, but the photos did seem to show a stagger for the .50's themselves. I chalk that up to distortion caused by the lenses used or parallax error.

Another interesting question is the paint scheme used on MERIDITH - the 5-S seems to be painted exactly like WOOLSEY - all the way up forward - based on my enlargement of the color photo. The timing of the two photos does not contradict this conclusion.

Is this the 1941 "Atlantic" scheme mentioned by Tracy White as opposed to MS-12, or is this just another interpretation at the DesDiv or yard level? ( apologies in advance for linking to your earlier image )

[Rick E Davis]

I'm not a camo expert, so I can't answer your question with confidence. But, the period during late 1941 into early 1942 was one of experiment with ship camo of which some designs were influenced by what the Royal Navy was doing. Boston Navy Yard was one of the centers of those efforts so this design was an offical one. I just can't put a name to it or know the colors used.

This scheme reminds me of the Ms 18 scheme that was used on some ships (FLETCHERS and others) in late 1942 into early 1943, with the hull being one solid color and the superstructure being a single lighter color.

[Rick E Davis]

I just got my pre-ordered BENSON 1945 kit from Dragon-USA and as Tim's review says, this kit has the most options of any BENSON-GLEAVES kits released so far. The new components in this kit are for the aft deckhouse with two twin 40-mm mounts and the late war Mk 28 radar for the Mk 37 director. This kit can be used to represent the six early BENSON's (DD-421, 422, 425-428) or by kit-bashing with a GLEAVES class kit, can be used to model many of the mid-to-late war GLEAVES class destroyers with two quint TT mounts (or with scratch-built modifications one of the units with the extra four 20-mm and two single 40-mm mounts ). The kit has the components for the repeat-BENSONS aft deckhouse form early kits as well. A lot of options here. As always, you will need to check photos to account for the variations between ships modified at different yards, but modifications shouldn't be too hard.

Now I have to find time to actually build a kit.

[Dick J]

Rick,

Does the kit have the unique open bridge option for DD-422?

[Rick E Davis]

Dick,

Sorry, but no ... that will require scratch-building.

[JABBA]

Dear All,

I am about to work on Benson Class kit in pre-war configuration and desperatly searching for some detailes not found on intensive search on web,

a/ details pictures of aft superstructure, side shots as well as headshot preferable

b/ camouflage options, I saw ships in pre-war grey, in Ms.1 and Ms.2 colors in this configuration, but using Ms.12 regular or modified scheme is questionable

c/ when was aft superstructer deleted during ships construction, respectively cut off from the existing ships ?

d/ any other visible diferency between as built very early configuration and later on, still before US entry into WWII ?

Any reaction is very appreciate.

Many thanks in advance.

Jindrich N.

[Rick E Davis]

Jindrich,

You are asking for an article's worth of information.

First off, there are two different classes that are sometimes grouped as the "BENSON" class, so I don't know which ship you are planning on modeling. In the first group of BENSON-GLEAVES destroyers, there were six BENSON's (DD421-422 and 425-428) and eighteen GLEAVES' (DD423-424 and 429-444) units built. Also, are you planning on scratch building an early pre-war "BENSON"?

I'm going to start to answer your question with a list of the early BENSON-GLEAVES dual class. I'm going to list them in order of commissioning date, that will help me to answer some of your questions.


Hull # Name Class Builder Commissioned
DD-423 Gleaves (Gleaves) BIW 14-Jun-40
DD-431 Plunkett (Gleaves) Federal 17-Jul-40
DD-421 Benson (Benson) Beth-Quincy 25-Jul-40
DD-424 Niblack (Gleaves) BIW 1-Aug-40
DD-425 Madison (Benson) BosNY 6-Aug-40
DD-428 Charles F. Hughes (Benson) PSNY 5-Sep-40
DD-427 Hilary P. Jones (Benson) ChNY 7-Sep-40
DD-432 Kearny (Gleaves) Federal 13-Sep-40
DD-426 Lansdale (Benson) BosNY 17-Sep-40
DD-422 Mayo (Benson) Beth-Quincy 18-Sep-40
DD-429 Livermore (Gleaves) BIW 7-Oct-40
DD-430 Eberle (Gleaves) BIW 4-Dec-40
DD-433 Gwin (Gleaves) BosNY 15-Jan-41
DD-439 Edison (Gleaves) Federal 31-Jan-41
DD-435 Grayson (Gleaves) ChNY 14-Feb-41
DD-434 Meredith (Gleaves) BosNY 1-Mar-41
DD-438 Ludlow (Gleaves) BIW 5-Mar-41
DD-436 Monssen (Gleaves) PSNY 14-Mar-41
DD-440 Ericsson (Gleaves) Federal 31-Mar-41
DD-441 Wilkes* (Gleaves) BosNY 22-Apr-41
DD-437 Woolsey* (Gleaves) BIW 7-May-41
DD-443 Swanson** (Gleaves) ChNY 29-May-41
DD-442 Nicholson ** (Gleaves) BosNY 3-Jun-41
DD-444 Ingraham** (Gleaves) ChNY 17-Jul-41

Early built "Repeat-GLEAVES" destroyers
DD-453 Bristol*** (Gleaves) Federal 22-Oct-41
DD-454 Ellyson*** (Gleaves) Federal 28-Nov-41
DD-457 Emmons (Gleaves) BIW 5-Dec-41
DD-463 Corry (Gleaves) ChNY 18-Dec-41
DD-455 Hambleton*** (Gleaves) Federal 22-Dec-41
DD-456 Rodman*** (Gleaves) Federal 27-Jan-42

The early group BENSON and GLEAVES units were armed, as you know, with five 5-in guns in single mounts (53 and 54 mounts were open), ten torpedo tubes in two mounts, and six 50-cal machine guns (MG's). All of these were delivered in pre-war peace-time gray. In the summer of 1941 the King Board recommended alterations for this class called for the removal of the searchlight tower and increasing the number of 50-cal MG's. For DesRon 7 units .... including all six of the BENSON's ... (DD421-428 and 431) five 5-in guns were retained but the aft torpedo tube mount was removed and ten 50-cal MG's added. The rest of the early group of GLEAVES class destroyers were reduced to four 5-in guns, all ten torpedo tube mounts retained and the number of 50-cal MG's were increased to twelve. The remaining open mounts were given a "half-shield" with a canvas top. Most of the units ALREADY built and in service were modified in July-August 1941 to the new standard. At this same time as the USN was all but in the Atlantic War against the U-Boats, camo was applied. Some units were painted in Ms 1 while still having the searchlight tower prior to any modifications.

This is where it gets interesting. As you can see from the "as commissioned" list above, several units were not commissioned until the summer of 1941. For units built by USN Yards, the commission date DID NOT mean they were completed and delivered to the USN. What this means is that some units were delivered with the original configuration (with the searchlight tower) but were soon modified by the USN Home Yards for those ships to the new King Board configuration (this applied at least to the units marked with "*" and likely applied to others commissioned in the Spring of 1941). Actually, the last three units commissioned (units marked "**") were completed and "delivered" to the operational force in the revised King Board configuration and painted in Ms 1.

Another interesting aspect is that the "Repeat-GLEAVES" class units were ordered to the SAME design as the early group and were building to that standard. Several changes (four fully enclosed 5-in mounts, and only one torpedo tube mount) were authorized and incorporated into the repeat units as the contracts could be modified. An interesting fact is that the first four repeat GLEAVES class units built by Federal Ship Building were delivered WITH the searchlight tower and was removed by the USN home yard and modified to the "standard" configuration. (Standard configuration for BRISTOL was more like the original batch of GLEAVES than the repeat GLEAVES units.)

As for camo, the early BENSON-GLEAVES units modified to the King Board configuration were painted in Ms 1, 2, early Ms 12, and Ms 12(mod). I have only seen photos of the DesDiv 22 units (DD433-436) in Ms 1 while still retaining the searchlight tower. If you have specific ships you are interested in, I can see if I have images of them. But, I don't have enough photos or information to fully document which ships wore which camo ... and WHEN ... during 1941.

If you wish to model an unit that served in the original configuration in peace-time gray for some period of time ... I suggest picking one of the units commissioned in 1940.

Here are a few views of searchlight towers on ...

DD-431 PLUNKETT on 16 July 1940


DD-436 MONSSEN on 16 May 1941


DD-453 BRISTOL on 1 October 1941 under construction.

[JABBA]

Dear Rick,

this is fantastic, and many thanks for your continuous support.

I have not decided yet which ship/precise class my model will represent, but definitly from she�s initial configuration. I will go through all available documents on Saturday and Sunday to make decision. Generally I prefer ships in camuflaged coat, but who knows, pre-war grey is not bad option after all. I let you know what is the final selection.

By the way there is another mystery, at least for me.

It seems that two upper construction for searching platform existed according to provided pictures, i.e. as full level and two semilevels. I noted this differency already during my picture observation but ships was always taken from distance, so some details was not visible.

Differency according to Ship Builder Co. ?

Jindrich N.

[Rick E Davis]

Jindrich,

I don't fully understand your question. If you could restate it and reference images on say Navsource.org, maybe I could address it.

If your question is were there variations in construction between builders, that is almost always true, I have noted minor differences between ships, particularly between the two classes. Also, as the ships were built over time, there were some changes made to ships. Picking a subject or a group of subjects would narrow down the configuration differences.

[taskforce48]

Rick,

I think Jindrich was referencing the searchlight platform, On the Plunkett and the Bristol there is a stepped arrangement where as the Monssen is a single level. Jindrich, once you narrow down your subject, it will make research much easier. This class was vast in differences between sister ships both small and large details and at different times.

I have not decided yet which ship/precise class my model will represent, but definitly from she�s initial configuration. I will go through all available documents on Saturday and Sunday to make decision. Generally I prefer ships in camuflaged coat, but who knows, pre-war grey is not bad option after all. I let you know what is the final selection.

Some of these ships did have paint schemes other than the peacetime grey in this configuration, I know for sure that MS-1 was used and I believe there were some others but I don't remember off of the top of my head.

Matt

[Rick E Davis]

Now I get the question. Thanks Matt.

Removing the aft platform just aft of the searchlight (I think this platform was for a rangefinder, not sure it was installed) was done on at least two units in about April 1941. Note the images below; MONSSEN when commissioned had the aft platform (but was still incomplete, note no shield on 55 mount), by May 1941 the platform was gone. And then on MEREDITH on 3 April 1941 in peacetime grey with platform and just a few later on 29 April 1941 that the platform is gone and she has been repainted into Ms 1. However, GRAYSON still has the platform after being painted in Ms 1. Note on the list I posted earlier that GRAYSON was commissioned before MEREDITH. These three images are the only ones I have of this class in Ms 1 while still retaining the searchlight tower. Others could have been painted in Ms 1 prior to having the tower removed, I don't know. As the two photos of MEREDITH in April 1941 shows, camo can change quickly.

The searchlight tower was being removed shortly after these April-May 1941 photos. In my notes on the few of these early BENSON-GLEAVES units I have looked at their BuShips files, the searchlight tower and additional MG's were authorized on 14 May 1941. DD-426 was modified 28 May-17 June 1941 at Norfolk Navy Yard, DD-425 was modified in June-July 1941, DD-431 was modified by 28 July 1941 at Boston Navy Yard, DD-437 modified by 8 September 1941 at Boston Navy Yard, DD-438 and DD-439 were modified by 23 August 1941 at Boston Navy Yard, and DD-441 was modified by 28 July 1941 at Boston Navy Yard. So things were happening quickly in the summer of 1941. I have suspected that MONSSEN was modified and repainted not long after the May 1941 photos were taken, but I have not looked into her files yet for exact dates. MONSSEN was built on the West Coast and she went to the East Coast at some point.

DD-436 MONSSEN on 14 March 1941


DD-433 GWIN on 15 May 1941



DD-434 MEREDITH on 3 April 1941 (note peacetime grey and searchlight tower has the two level)


DD-434 MEREDITH on 29 April 1941 (note that her searchlight tower has been altered)


DD-435 GRAYSON on 2 May 1941